IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
BHARGAV D. KARIA, J.
Yogashram Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. – Appellant
Versus
Ashish Kiritkumar Purani – Respondent
R/Special Civil Application No. 17081 of 2021 With R/Special Civil Application No. 21824 of 2019
Decided on : 04-08-2023
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned Senior Advocate Mr. Kamal Trivedi with learned advocate Mr. Ravindra Shah for the petitioner and learned Senior Advocate Mr. Mihir Joshi with learned advocate Mr. Jay Kansara for the respondents.
2. Special Civil Application No.17081/2021 is filed by the petitioner society with the following prayers:
(B) pending hearing and final disposal of the petition, to restrain the Respondents, their agents, assigns, servants, whosoever etc. from carrying on erection or execution of construction of whatsoever nature in Sub-Plot 32/A of the Petitioner Society;
(C) pending hearing and final disposal of the petition, to stay the further execution, implementation and operation of the impugned judgment dated 18.10.2021 passed by the Gujarat State Cooperative Tribunal at Annexure-AB (Pages 396 422) to the petition and the impugned award and operative part of the judgment dated 30.08.2019 rendered by the board of nominees, Amdavad in Lavad suit 217/2017 at Annexure-S (Pages 251 - 275) to the petition;
(D) pending hearing and final disposal of the petition, to extend the stay order dated 18.102.2021 passed by the tribunal at Annexure- AB (Pages 396-422) to petition;”
3. Special Civil Application No.21824/2019 is filed with the following prayers:
(B) to issue a writ of mandamus or in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction prohibiting the Respondent Authorities in accepting or approving any plan of Flat-Type or non-residential construction or in the nature of having superstructure construction of more than Ground plus Two Floors from the Respondents 3 to 5 or from any other person and granting construction permission for any Sub-Plot situated within the Petitioner Society;
(C) to issue a writ of mandamus or in the nature of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the Respondents Authorities, officers, assigns, servants, etc. to remove the construction of existing superstructure erected by the Respondents 3 to 5 on Sub-Plot 32/A in the Petitioner Society and to remove the Respondents 3 to 5 to from the premises of Sub-Plot 32/A in the Petitioner Society:
(D) pending hearing and final disposal of the petition, to restrain the Respondents 3 to 5, their agents, assigns, servants, etc. from carrying on erection or execution of construction of whatsoever nature in Sub-Plot 32/A of the Petitioner Society;
(E) pending hearing and final disposal of the petition, to direct the Respondents 1 and 2 to forthwith stop the Respondents 3 to 5, their agents, assigns, servants, etc. from carrying on erection or execution of construction of whatsoever nature in Sub-Plot 32/A of the Petitioner Society;”
4. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner- Yogashram Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. was registered on 11.01.1962 under the Bombay Cooperative Societies Act, 1925
Brij Mohan Das Laxman Das v. Commissioner of Income – tax[(1997) 1 SCC 352]
Commissioner of Income-Tax, Bombay v. Podar Cement Pvt. Ltd.
Chandrika Jha v. State of Bihar
Daman Singh v. State of Punjab
Dr. Manohar Ramchandra Sarfare v. Konkan Co-operative Housing Society Ltd.
Mithilesh Kumari v. Prem Bihari Khare[(1989) 2 SCC 95]
R. Rajgopal Reddy v. Padmini Chandrasekharan [(1995) 2 SCC 630]
State of U.P v. Chheoki Employees Co-operative Society Ltd.
State Bank of India v. V. Ramakrishnan (2018) 17 SCC 394
State of Bihar v. Ramesh Prasad Verma (2017) 5 SCC 665
R. Rajgopal Reddy v. Padmini Chandrasekharan [(1995) 2 SCC 630]
State of Bihar v. Ramesh Prasad Verma (2017) 5 SCC 665
T.N. Electricity Board v. Status Spg. Mills Ltd. (2008) 7 SCC 353
Union of India v. Martin Lottery Agencies Ltd. (2009) 12 SCC 209
Decisions made by the General Body of a Cooperative Society are binding on all members, and members cannot independently challenge such decisions unless they are overturned by a competent authority.
The main legal principle established is that the decisions of the General Body of a Co-operative Society, approved in accordance with the Act and Rules, should be respected and implemented, emphasizi....
The court affirmed that members must challenge resolutions to preserve their rights, and the Registrar's approval of amendments is valid if compliant with the Act and Rules.
A cooperative society's resolutions regarding redevelopment require majority consent, which prevails over minority objections; judicial review is limited to errors of law or process.
A public trust registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1850 is competent to enter into a contract and can become a member of a co-operative society, subject to the provisions of the Gujarat Co-....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.